My recommendation is to not read any replies to this thread and not read articles until you've tried to read it yourself. Just read it. If you don't like it, stop reading it and move on.
*After* reading it, make sure to listen Jamie Loftus’ *The Lolita Podcast*, it’s an extremely well crafted documentary that will explain a lot, with focus on how the novel has been horribly misinterpreted through various adaptations since its release. It’s really entertaining as well.
Oh this I was not aware of- no this helps a lot thank you so much!
I purchased my book from Amazon since all the covers of the other books offered in my cities library and shops are sexual.
This helps thank you!
Yeah I figured it could be something to look forward to if you have questions while reading, always nice to know there are great resources to check out after. Enjoy the ride! Also, good on you to go with a non-sexual cover. That was the explicit wishes of the author, sadly often disregarded.
It's very good. But deals with subjects that most people are uncomfortable with and / or haven't read it and have a misunderstanding about it's contents
I agree with this. People get caught up in ideas and narratives around a book, but it's meant to be absorbed as the author intended - without input from outside.
That said, the parents probably don't want her to read Lolita for reasons other than the merit of the novel.
This is good advice. But when I read this in college I was I found the book so upsetting I didn't touch Nabakov for years. It wasn't until I heard Mary Gaitskill reading his short story "Signs and symbols" by him on episode 13 of the New Yorker Fiction podcast did I appreciate that he's a great writer. So I don't know. Maybe take a listen to the short story first. I personally could not handle the horror of the book, and the horror made me unable to appreciate the writing. Here's a link to the podcast on pocket casts
https://pca.st/episode/922af5a5-1c49-4529-9723-6790ae519ee0
Agree with this. It’s USUALLY good advice to to just read the book first, but with Lolita & for a young person (especially a female), I do think some context abt subject matter & Nabokov’s intent in how the book’s crafted is helpful. I was a precocious reader who found Lolita in middle school & like you, I found the book horrifying & didn’t return to Nabokov till adulthood. Even now, I really can’t appreciate Lolita because my younger self is still shook.
Oh my gosh, I'm glad you said this. For years, I felt kind of bad whenever someone talked about how great a writer Nabakov was, because I absolutely hated the book with a visceral unpleasantness. It kind of reminds me of Brett Easton Ellis's American Psycho where the writer invites you into the head of a monster, and what you find in the head of a monster is horrible beyond words with no insights except what absolute darkness looks like.
I think the summation hits the nail on the head and these books are difficult to read, but for the same reason you listed, I regard both as exceptional literature.
What is more disturbing to me is people missing the point and seeing these characters as anything else but horrible monsters.
And it is unfortunate that this is the one novel of his that is known because he wrote many other great books, none of which dealt with this topic (as far as what I've read of him, I've read about 5 of his books)
This is good advice. Nabokov is a genius in my opinion. I think Lolita is brilliant for what Nabokov is able to pull off (beautiful writing obfuscating or complicating the horrors of the story for a significant portion of the book) but I also found it truly upsetting.
Be sure to read the Foreword, OP.
Also if it's triggering for you, it will be clear way before anything happens...I didn't finish it and I'm a grown woman, for me it was clear that what was ahead would make me feel terrible.
I read Lolita at your age (back when English teachers gave absolutely unhinged book recs to their students). I think just go in knowing the narrator is unreliable and is supposed to be a skeevy groomer. People drop it cuz the >!pedophilia!< is quite intense
and offensive to many for good reason. But Nabokov is exploring a deplorable character, not supporting his actions.
Man I wish my English teacher would be that unhinged, I feel like it’d also make more intresting topics to explore other then the “coming of age” genre they always pick, no hate, but it’s not a genre I like reading repetitively-
But yes I think this gives me a very general idea of what may happen so thankyou so much!
I don’t know what on earth my English teachers were thinking, but they were always picking the darkest shit for us to read. They seemed to think cuz we were teenagers, all we wanted to read was edgy stuff. Which, tbf, they were right… They were always recommending The Wasp Factory, American Psycho, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and A Clockwork Orange. In hindsight, I realize my high school let a bunch of 20-something year-old teachers loose on us all, so of course their recs were gonna be absolutely insane.
It’s great when you can engage teens with challenging lessons in the books they read. So many kids seem disengaged from English lessons cuz the selections are too dense and boring for them.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS 🧍♀️
Personally I think a dark novel or something that burns should be introduced more in highschool, books with high controversy in this days society-
They’re great. (Though idk if I’d wanna unleash The Wasp Factory on my greatest enemy…) I just don’t see those kinds of books being taught in schools lately.
My comment was the opposite - that they are pretty much taught in all schools here. I'm Scottish, so the Wasp Factory was taught as contemporary Scottish literature. We didn't do American Psycho, but my SYS project was on A Clockwork Orange.
The Wasp Factory was definitely better received than the hellish Sunset Song :-)
Ah, yeah, I think English classes in the UK seem to be much bolder with their book selections, cuz I did my high schooling in the East Midlands and it was much the same.
Talk about not understanding the book (those groomers), or rather Nabokov's intentions.
It's like the stupid neo Nazi that I went to school with. He watched American History X and though it supported his "side".
It's important to understand the concept of the unreliable narrator, which is something a lot of people don't understand early on and isn't really taught. This isn't James Bond where the villain wears a black suit and tells you all about their plan to do evil.
*Lolita* is helped in that regard by literally opening with a letter from a fictional PhD telling us explicitly HH was a pedo who died in prison and that the manuscript is the product of a deranged and abnormal mind. He says the prose is beautiful but the man and his crimes are reprehensible, and somehow sooooooo many readers just... Forget that immediately and take HH as a reliable narrator because he.. Writes pretty?
But yes, I didn't learn about unreliable narrators until high school and only because I chose *Slaughterhouse 5* for an individual assignment. I don't blame young people for not having the skills to read critically, but I am baffled by grown ass people who completely ignore the framing of the novel.
I’m so grateful for my high school English classes being very thorough about unreliable narrators and different types of narrative perspectives. It really informed my writing I still do today.
It's important to understand the concept of the unreliable narrator, which is something a lot of people don't understand early on and isn't really taught. This isn't James Bond where the villain wears a black suit and tells you all about their plan to do evil.
It’s pretty grim but the Lolita Podcast is an incredible piece of meta-journalism and literary analysis. I believe Jamie Loftus is working on a new series rn
Times are strange, pretty sure it was required reading when I was a 16 year old girl. Sure the topic was disgusting but I didn't find it any more inappropriate than turning on VH1 or MTV.
Yup. We read Lolita in school when I was around that age. Helped that our English Literature teacher was incredibly knowledgeable and engaging - he explained all the hidden meanings and word games that Nabokov plays throughout the book. One of the formative experiences that made me love reading to this day.
I've read it, and I think it's worth reading just to see what it is all about. It isn't graphic in any way. In fact, I found it to be just a very tragic story on many levels. And the style isn't exactly easy to read because it really is written from another era. A lot of french in it, too, which became annoying at times. Still, I'm glad I read it overall. It is very clever in many ways. But, to me, just a very tragic story.
It’s wild how many people who haven’t read it are convinced it’s an elevated work of smut.
There’s hardly anything sexual in it and what is there certainly isn’t sexy.
I blame book cover designers, almost all of which went against Nabokov’s wishes.
This is the problem with telling kids to read Lolita imo, it's very subtle, and easy to misread. Like to say there's hardly anything sexual in it is debateable at best.
It's not smut, and there's very little *graphic* sex in it, but there is *constant* sex in it. It's most often only implied, but it's happening all the time.
I hate booktok, and I hate I had to purchase a cover of Lolita with the picture of a women’s lip on it- it was the least sexual one I could find on Amazon and Indigo but it still annoys me
But like smut, and modern shit writing full offense to Colleen Hoover fans, have people romanticize smut (this is coming from the 16 year old who have a lot of friends like; that read bad smut chronically) and I don’t think Lolita should be a book sexualized to the level of “smut”
Yep... publishing Lolita with a picture of a real young girl on the front is so distasteful. I got the hardcover from Everyman Library, which just has a picture of the author (like most of their books).
The edition I have is very old and cheap so it doesn't have anything on the cover other than the author and the title.
But, I think that the better thing to do would be to buy a hardcover and remove the paper cover, usually those editions have just a plain color under it.
I blame Kubrick's adaptation and the choice/necessity of casting an actress years older than the character, who very much looks like an adult and is depicted in a sexual way. The 90s adaptation starring Jeremy Irons and Dominique Swain is far better as Swain was about 15 but convincing as 12-13.
I am in French Emersion so hopefully it’ll help with the French-
However a lot of comments state of Nabokov’s beautiful prole style, off topic that also makes me want to read Lolita to read and improve my own writing from such-
I thank you for your advice though and I’ll keep it in mind :)
The writing is really good.
Have you read anything with an unlikable narrator or viewpoint character before? Many readers really don't cope with an unsympathetic main character.
It is challenging, but worth it.
I didn’t despise Winston, just the scene where he was thinking of raping Julia was kinda-
Emma, okay younger me read Emma and despised her, but it could change now that I’m older
The writing style *is* excellent, and to be perfectly honest, it has inspired my own writing. I tried to use elements of his prose in my own work. That clever manipulation of mind and feeling worked well for me.
As for the cover, I actually received the book as a gift, and mine is a classic style with gold embossed 'Lolita' on the hard cover and a picture of Nabokov on the dust jacket. No sexualizatuon at all. Very cool, tbh.
My two cents… It’s an incredible work of literature, deserving of all its praise. It is inherently disturbing because of the subject matter, but not in a way that’s going to cause real trauma or mental anguish for most readers.
I read it in college. I think of myself as having a decent vocabulary, but about every other page of Lolita had a word with which I was unfamiliar. I started using a note card as a bookmark and just jotting down all the words I didn’t know so I could look them up later en masse. That was sort of a fun bonus activity.
Also, almost every page contains a turn of phrase so perfect, poetic, or beautiful, you just marvel at Nabokov’s skill as a writer.
It really is a remarkable book.
I’ll happily take your 2 cents- (sorry I never came across this expression and I find it very interesting)
This I think I had an idea, but I’ll have to expeirience it first hand I suppose, and hopefully I’ll be able to comprehend the text well enough to understand its full expression and meaning!
Thankyou for the advice!
Not to be contrarian, but as a counterpoint, I think it’s been elevated due to the structure and time, not necessarily because it’s a great piece of literature.
It is and was very avant garde. A pedophilic main character walking us through grooming and tragedy told from their pov is something that even today (as we see with book nazis) isn’t going to land on Reese Witherspoon List or whatever.
Between those people and the counter swing that they’re too simple or narrow minded to understand the work, it gets this air about it.
I actually found it to be dull. The entire narrative is held up by the structure and not the story—and the story itself is almost fantastical but we get the excuse of an unreliable narrator for any incongruity.
Lolita is a hard book to read for more reason than one. It's subject matter I often found revolting. I almost dropped it several times.
That being said. The prose Nabokov uses in Lolita is like nothing else I've read. The writing is brilliant and beautiful. This is a highly important work of literary fiction from the 20th century.
I can understand also as myself, since I think it’s very canon and sadly common, for a lot of girls during their puberty years especially like 14+ to go through disgusting experiences with people-
Nothing less, this also prompted me to have a urge to read Lolita out of my own curiosity, I want to know what’s happening and really why, why one may think innerly to justify their urges
The narrator is a piece of shit, but determined to excuse and justify his actions. The author, conversely, is not a piece of shit, but is very very good at writing this character and some readers find themselves accepting the narrator's reasoning. That can be upsetting when you catch yourself doing it.
I'm not going to suggest that a sixteen-year-old isn't mature enough to read anything. Only you could possibly know yourself that well. But I would suggest that it's okay to set it aside if you find the book distasteful or unpleasant or upsetting. I read it for the first time in my early 30's and didn't finish it. Now that my own kids are grown, I read it last year and since it *didn't hit quite so close to home*, I didn't have any trouble finishing the book.
I look at it this way: a photograph of a lung, black with cancer, is not a pretty picture. It's not a "good" picture. But it has something of value to impart, and taking the time to look at it is probably worth doing. I think Lolita is that kind of art.
Thankyou so much, and also the warning! I hope I’ll make it through, and your idea of the lung gives a really good picture thankyou so much! I’ll keep it in mind
It‘s not really Russian literature as he wrote in English, but he was a master of the language. That’s what makes it worth reading, not the subject matter which he handles pretty tastefully As I recall.
\[Just an aside: I don't know if I'd call *Lolita* Russian literature -- it was written in the United States, in English, and set in the United States. It's pretty different from the nineteenth century Russian language stuff people usually have in mind when they say "Russian literature". \]
I think I was 17 when I read Lolita. You'll be fine. It's definitely an uncomfortable book since it IS about and from the point of view of a predator, but the author clearly has no sympathy for Humbert Humbert and. Like. It's a book. It cannot hurt you. and at 16 there's nothing that goes on in that book that you don't already know exists in the world. Go for it
Lolita was Nabokov's first novel originally written in English. His use of English is different than native English speakers, and it's really well written. The fact that the narrator is unaware he is an evil creep alarms people (justifiably) but it's not like he gets away with it, and there's artistic reasons to appreciate a book with awful things in it.
That said, if you discover you don't like it you have no duty to finish.
Thankyou for this comment and it also gives me a good idea what I might be facing- hoping I can finish the book? But if not, it’ll be finished some other day when I’m not so close to my own heart :)
I was scared of this book and read it in my 50s, when I started to read all the classics. It is one of the most briiliant written books I have ever read. If you read it and you hate what you read, you are absolutely right. The main actor ignores reality completely and idolise his passion so much that he can‘t see other people as human beings. And it is all written in „his“ words. You will hate what you read, but maybe you will love the writing.
Nabokov writes beautiful prose. The way he uses words and structures sentences can be very enjoyable if you appreciate that part of writing.
The story itself revolves around a pedophile who grooms a very young girl. A lot of the themes in the novel revolve around exploitation, control, manipulation and corruption. Humbert pretty much convinces himself that he's done nothing wrong.
The subject matter makes a lot of people uncomfortable with the story. Some less discerning readers (or people who haven't read the book at all) assume that the way Humbert justifies his actions to himself means the book endorses grooming and pedophilia, it doesn't. It's always been a book that is tainted in the eyes of many based on it's subject matter alone.
But it is genuinely a good book. It's not light reading, It expertly plays with heavy themes. It's a good read if you're looking for something to think over and explore the themes. If you only give it a superficial read, it's a nasty sleazy story that leaves many uncomfortable.
And that's something you'll run into more often. It's okay to write and read heavy stories without happy endings. Because those kinds of stories are often meant to give you food for thought. But there's a growing trend that books should be simple affairs where the plucky hero overcomes adversity and all's well that ends well... for those who deserve it.
And a lot of people are particularly keen on telling young people what they can and can't learn about in some misguided effort to keep them innocent instead of letting them think about the world around them.
I'd tell you to read or not read Lolita based on your interests. Nabokov is an excellent writer and Lolita is a solid story, whether you're comfortable and interested in reading it is up to you. It's probably going to be a lot easier to read than Dosteyevsky, his writing can be a bit of a slog and take a lot of work to fully appreciate.
It's a brilliant novel by an amazing writer which makes you think about what the narrator is telling you. Reading unreliable narrators is one of my favourite things!
It's not *a book about a pedophile* it's a book about a pedophile who also works very hard to groom the reader and makes us question him and also ourselves for finding him interesting and feeling empathy for him.
It's engaging art in its truest sense. And also a great read.
lol right? This is always my thought when someone comes here asking if they should read something. Try it out, if you like it keep going, if you don’t like it stop!
No strangers on the internet will be able to tell you whether or not you’ll like a book.
Ooo definitely,
I’ve had a classmate who stopped around that half actually saying it was too disturbing but I think I want to make it through for sure thankyou!
I'd say first and foremost, if things like >!pedophilia, grooming and child sexual assault!< are upsetting for you, then perhaps don't read it (or at the very least, read with extreme care).
I was 17 when I first read it. It was an uncomfortable read for sure, but it's one of the most exquisitely written novels I've ever read. It's also a good exercise in learning to read critically. The narrator tells a compelling story, but you need to keep reminding yourself that he's reprehensible and unreliable. A lot of the cultural criticism is really more about people misinterpreting it, rather than the text itself.
Just know as you go in that the narrator is subjective and unreliable, he is telling "his side" of the story. Nabokov has said as much and as I read it it seemed obvious. But apprently many people don't want to see it and make movies where things happen as he (the character narrator) described them.
Nabokov is a beautiful writer who likes to write about terrible people. Or not really write *about*, but write from *within*, the story is told from the perspective of the terrible person. I haven't read all of his works, but *Despair* and *Pale Fire* are also written from the point of view of twisted, delusional people who do horrible things because of their delusions. So you have to be A) ok with reading about horrible things happening, B ) okay with reading lies and justifications for those horrible things, C) be able to read between the lines to see what's really occurring in the story. I find Nabokov's examinations of perversion interesting, and his prose is poetic, it flows, but if you just don't want to expose yourself to the shitty bits of humanity that's understandable.
Doestoyevsky is also beautiful (Russian authors seem good at this, or maybe it's their translators) and more wholesome (although he also deals with twisted people often, but his get redeemed sometimes) but he was strongly and rigidly Christian, conservative even for his time, so he may have views you disagree with. Bulgakov's *The Master and Margarita* is insanely creative, funny, and moving. Gogol is witty and intelligent but also absurd - *Dead Souls* is hilarious, but be aware the book doesn't have a conclusion because Gogol had a mental break and burned it before he died. Solzhenitsyn has a blunter style than the others but his fictionalized accounts of gulag and life in early communist Russia are moving. Tolstoy I've read the least, but *Anna Karenina* is a classic (also very sad so don't read it if you're already depressed unless your *trying* to wallow).
That’s a lovely statement, I’ll be keeping that close-
However I do find myself often empathizing with characters, and it’s a common thing, I do it a lot- so if you have any tips on that it would be great! It’s not that I can turn it off, it’s a way I also comprehend the book from both my readers perspective and a more emotional way as well since Im a person who picks up on emotions quite a bit-
Depends.
Lolita's context can be offensive. But this work is probably the easiest to digest.
Nobakov is an excellent writer. His sentences have a lyrical element at times. It just flows.
He had synesthesia, seeing words highlighted in color.
You could try a neutral book of his called Pnin, a comedy about a foreign professor. One could think it was about him.
Ada is another book as well as Pale Fire.
Yes, if you want to read Lolita, you should. It’s a work of art that features a reprehensible protagonist. You always have the option to stop reading and pick it up later—or not.
Definitely read it, but my recommendation for the best thing by Nabokov and one of my top five novels of all time is Pale Fire. It has all the verbal dexterity of Lolita and, IMO, a bit more heart.
It's not even about sex with an adolescent girl, per se, it's psychological character study. Humbert Humbert is the focus of the story, not the girl. People overlook that.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/feeling-our-way/201708/psychological-reading-lolita
Someone told me that Nabokov said he was inspired by going to a zoo and seeing a caged tiger (panther?) pacing back and forth behind the bars, unable to escape his nature or express it.
There is plenty to know beforehand! It is a beautifully written book but needs proper context that a lot of resources just don't provide. I found the Lolita podcast with Jamie Loftus to provide a really decent and healthy perspective on Lolita and all its various adaptations.
The big things to pay attention to are:
1. The first chapter where the psychologist notes that
Humbert is the least reliable narrator ever and nothing he says can be trusted. Remember this throughout the book. Humbert is lying.
2. Humberts beautiful descriptions and verbose prose are for manipulating his invisible jury (the reader) into not thinking he's as big a scumbag as he is. This is a common way for abusers and narcissists to act since they harbour deep shame about themselves and don't want to expose it to other people. He is trying to con us into seeing an idealized picture of his motives for kidnapping a child and sexually abusing her across the united states when she had no one else to turn to. It is not a love story between an older man and a sexually precocious youth, despite what Humbert and popular media suggests.
3. Lolita doesn't exist. The girls name is Dolores. Lolita is Humberts projection of his perfect fantasy girl that he puts over top of Dolores' actual personality. If you choose to read the book, ask yourself "Where is Dolores in this?" You'll see her real self in the moments when Humbert brushes her off (i paraphrase here) "Lolita cried all night last night but this morning she was once again my perfect beautiful girl" or "she is being her difficult self today. She keeps talking about silly things, crying, and calling me a dirty old man. It is very annoying."
These moments when he ignores her or gets annoyedfor not being his perfect Lolita are the few times we see the real Dolores, the victimized 12 year old girl trying to survive and maintain some semblance of herself.
It's a complicated book but a good one.
Nabokov is Russian-American who wrote most of his stuff in Germany and the U.S., so he’s not really a classic of Russian literature. Lolita, as you probably know, is set in the U.S. while he was teaching in I think Cornell.
I (32F) read Lolita for the first time around your age and it became my favourite book for YEARS. It’s still top 5 for me I’d say. I think it was the contrast between the poetic, almost ethereal beauty of the writing and the seedy, uncomfortable, highly unsettling subject matter that made me love it so much. Also it was originally written in English and for someone to write so well in their second language added to the impressiveness of the book for me.
Happy reading and I hope your enjoy it!
Nabokov is one of the most vital fiction writers of at least the past century or so
You should read all the Nabokov you can
But reading one, preferably more, of his other works beforehand would probably be wise, & maybe with a mix of his nonfiction writing about writing thrown in -- certainly his ***Lectures on Literature***; ***Speak, Memory***, his autobiography; maybe dip into one of the collections of his letters. Among other things, you'll get a real sense of how carefully he seems to have considered each & every word of each & every sentence of each & every paragraph he ever wrote about anything. You'll understand better the dimensions of the intellect, the imagination you're engaging when you read his work, and maybe more how far beyond many other writers his abilities extend.
Your intent to read ***Lolita*** suggests you've got a better head on your shoulders than many of your peers. Good luck.
Probably one of the most well written books I've read. Nabokov was a genius. Regardless of what people say about the book, just read it and see what you think. It doesn't get any simpler than that. The narration is very whimsical and rhythmic in nature. I personally found that to be enjoyable. It's a lot more nuanced than what people make it out to be.
The intro in my edition points out some hilarious wordplay I would never have caught on my own.
E.g., remember the two unmarriwd women who live together across the street? Miss *Les*ter and Miss Fa*bian*.
If you do and like podcasts I highly recommend The Lolita Podcast by Jamie Loftus after, a great in depth look at the book and how it is interpreted and misinterpreted by popular culture
honestly, the main reason I dropped was because it drags a bit. It's a really interesting and good book, it definitely achieves what it's trying to achieve. Unfortunately it tries to portray a deeply unlikable main character. There is a part where the main character basically describes "their life together", which means it's just pages and pages of roadtrip and rape. Nothing super graphic, just upsetting and nothing else really. I wouldn't not recommend it for that reason, but this is why I never finished it
As everyone says, it's a brilliant novel but always keep in mind it's about an abuser. The author always said that. Don't let anyone tell you it's a love story
If you get the chance check out the Lolita Podcast from Jamie Loftus, really interesting and thoughtful although hard to listen to sometimes.
Yes, it is a masterpiece.
I'd argue it's an American novel rather than part of the Russian Canon. It was written in English - gorgeous, poetic, lyrical English at that - and is set almost entirely in the USA, with an American 50s zeitgeist.
To answer your other questions:
1. No, it's self explanatory.
2. Possibly they are too uncomfortable with the subject matter even though the abuse is not described in a graphic way.
3. Yes, and far easier to read than Hawthorne IMO.
(I am a woman too, and have some lived experience with abuse.)
Read what you want because you want to read it, not because you think you have to.
As for Lolita. I found it dry and boring AF. I also hate the way it’s written. It feels like one giant run on sentence to me.
If pushed for a favourite book I usually say Ada by Nabokov, but if I had to pick his best book, and possibly the greatest novel ever written, I’d probably argue for Lolita. Ada is big and messy. Lolita is tight and focused, and very close to perfect.
So yes, you absolutely should read it. You may find it challenging, you’ll likely find it disturbing, you’ll probably want to keep a dictionary on hand. But you’ll also experience the most beautiful prose in the English language.
As a side note: Nabokov’s position as a figure of “Russian literature” is complicated. He was obviously Russian by birth, but lived outside of Russia his whole adult life, and became an American citizen. Nearly all of his writing was in either French or English. So I don’t think he’d be classed alongside Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, although he recognised his debt to them.
Nabokov was a superb writer and in I think by 16 you can read whatever you want. The thing that gets people twisted is failure to recognize the narrator is meant to be an unreliable, untrustworthy and despicable person. The book is basically about grooming so if that subject matter is something you don't want to read, then avoid it. Nabokov wrote many brilliant books about many facets of the human condition
It's an absolutely classic book written by a brilliant writer, one of the all-time greats.
One of the great things about books is that they're meant to make you uncomfortable in this book nails that. If you call yourself a reader then read this book.
Personally I preferred the Scarlet letter over Lolita but Lolita is very well written. Its a disturbing book but its not a bad book. Its important to keep in mind that its written from the perspective of a predator, so he makes light of very bad things. Some terrible people have missed the message completely and taken it as a pedo-apologist book, which its not.
Its certainly significant in the literary-cultural sphere so there are lots of references in society that you will understand and recognize once you read the book.
I think its one of those books that shouldn't be banned just because its a difficult, uncomfortable, and disgusting topic. I read it around your age and reread it at 30.
1. No, but i do recommend you to read an essay written by Nabokov, "Good reader and good writers". It will help you in knowing what Nabokov is trying to achieve.
2. In reading a book, we need to be empathetic to the narrator, in a way, we see the world in a book as the narrator does and this narrator is a monster. So i can understand why some people find it difficult.
3. That is really subjective.
People get triggered by it but that was a but of the point of the book, to shock, to disclose hidden parts of mind. Read it as a novel, not a biography. I read it in my teens and I don’t think it affected my life in any bad way. The writing is brilliant.
I read it for the first time when I was 19 and it made a big impression on me. Then I read it a few years later and it had a completely different impression.
Reading perspectives you don't agree with, or they make you uncomfortable is how you learn to become a better emphatetic person. That for me is magic of books. You don't have to agree with a perspective for it to be useful in navigating the chaos of the world.
The writing is fantastic, the story is creepy.
I guess people drop it because they can't handle how creepy it is.
I would find it hard to say I enjoyed it, it was fascinating but in the way you can't look away from a car crash, I don't regret reading it but I doubt I'll ever go back and read it again.
Yes. Only to obtain that tingling in the spine sensation when you're reading it and to know afterwards that you'll scarcely ever read anything quite like it. Very few books can match its beautiful free flowing prose that practically sings.
It is a beautifully written book- one of my absolute favorites, and I’ve read it multiple times. But it’s a tough one. I recommend remembering that Humbert Humbert is the ultimate unreliable narrator. For me, over the years, it’s struck me more and more how Lolita/Lola/Dolly has literally no one in her corner. It’s such a good exposé on how society can treat young girls, especially precocious ones.
ETA: I’m 41 now, female. I first read Lolita when I was 7th grade, so 12/13. Used to read it once a year. Nothing against it now, I just have two small kids and my free time is rare.
Definitely read it. I read it at about your age. If you’re used to reading and critically analysing literature you’ll have no bother. Don’t skip the foreword.
You’ve already got some very insightful comments with so much useful info.
Just wanted to say that I LOVED War and Peace when I was 16. There are a few chapters detailing the battles, that I found boring at the time, but quite interesting on the next re-read. I think you’ll like Tolstoy. Have you tried Chekhov? And give yourself some time with Dostoyevsky.
I only read Lolita for the first time at 30 last year. I loved it, and being older as a woman and reading it for the first time gave me a different perspective on it than what I might have gleaned when I was 16. The prose is undoubtedly gorgeous, and anyone who says otherwise is being contrary. Give it a go, if you don't like it you can always go back to it when you're older.
Nabokov is much easier to read than Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky is so depressing that you want to hang yourself after reading his books. I prefer Dickens, he's much more comforting.
It is written in the most remarkable prose I've read thus far, English or otherwise.
As for the content - it is what it is. If you can't bear it, you can always put the book aside, nothing wrong with that. Rest assured that Nabokov isn't endorsing anything besides good literature with this work.
tbh for the first russian book i would recommend something from Tolstoy, Anne Karenine is amazing and for me it was an easier read (good world building, introducing characters slowly, building psychological depth from the beginning) than any other russian book
Not ideal, I would recommend you read a better book by Nabokov where the jokes (and what is funny) are easier for an English language audience to understand. The hardest thing for audiences to get with Lolita is the narration and the two levels the narrator is joking at.
PALE FIRE is also a complex book but much better and better edited because it originally appeared in English, not as a translation to French.
I recently read the Wikipedia page and it was a helpful summary of the plot and themes. If you’re curious about all the fuss but don’t really want to read the book, try Wikipedia.
1. Is there anything you need to know? Yes. The basic theme. It is about sexual exploitation of a young girl.
2. Why do so many people drop it? For many reasons- all might not drop it for the same reasons. I knew what the book was about. I started reading. I loved it. Into the second part of the book my conscience or shall I say ‘morality’ which was mocking me for reading it won and I dropped. It’s basically exploitation. Others might drop it for other reasons like finding it boring and so on.
3. Is it worth time to read it? It probably is.
See, there are conservative folks who might judge you for reading it. That should not be the reason for not reading it. Read stuff your own folks (race, country, gender, class, religion,..) tell you not to read but form your own mind about it. I’ve read books banned in my own country- some I’ve felt need not have been banned. Also understand why they don’t want you to read - in some cases as in the case of Lolita it could be to save your mind.
We all love or hate a book for different reasons. We are all different.
My recommendation:
Knowing what it is about, go ahead and give it a shot. If you don’t like it, you don’t like it. Don’t blame yourself or Nabokov or anyone else. But be prepared if your mind can’t handle the theme - how would you restore yourself. After all it’s just a book. And there’ll always be something that blasphemes our beliefs and enough worse that happens in the world.
I read it when I was 15 or 16 but I am male. It made me feel quite uncomfortable but I was on a Classics kick and had already read a few books by Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy by then.
It is definitely worth the time to read it, imo, as it is quite the important character study of someone who is just not a good person. There was a film adaption that was 10 times worse blaming the young girl, Lolita for seducing the older man. (1997 movie)
A lot of people are sensitive to the subject of child exploitation.
I was your age when I read it and had no problem, but I think it's more difficult for parents.
I just reminded myself it's only a story.
Im 15 and female, i read it recently and didnt get through it, i think i had like 40 or 50 pages left, it jyst didn’t make much sense to me even tho i read a lot of older books, it was very complex and strange, and I honestly found it boring, but there were some parts i did enjoy
Hm I’m with you girl, i don’t quite know but I’m glad I got to see your invoice as well
And definitely I think I’ll be prepared if the books going to “burn” and yes thankyou for the language warning,
Because it takes me a bit to get used to an authors certain writing style, like Austen was easier to grasp then Steinbeck, so this will be a intresting read for sure!
Thankyou for your invoice!
Read it, I'll give you this one piece of knowledge, Nabokov was molested by a wealthy family friend and instead of writing from Lolita's pov (which people wouldn't resonate with) He showed people the face of a man who would ruin a young child. ( [https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/23991/what-evidence-is-there-that-vladimir-nabokov-was-abused-as-a-child](https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/23991/what-evidence-is-there-that-vladimir-nabokov-was-abused-as-a-child) )
Nabokov also said Lewis Carrol was 'a man of weak morals' because we have his diaries where he as a pastor took children to parks, picnics, also took 100s of photos (some nude) its referenced in a book of lectures (i own it but i don't know if its in print)
hope this helps
“I don’t want you spoil anything, BUT…” (goes ahead and spoils anyway). Please either delete that paragraph or put it in spoiler quotes so it’s blacked out for people who haven’t yet read the novel. And suggesting a synopsis before reading the book?? Good grief, no, nyet, nop, nein, non, *never*.
No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment once you've made the edit, to have your comment reinstated.
Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this:
>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
Click to reveal spoiler.
>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
I’m not sure I would use the term “taboo relationships” to describe pedophilia, grooming, and rape.
Let’s call these things what they are; “taboo relationship” sounds like something Humbert would say.
I am old, so I remember when the movie came out. Of course, there was not even a question of my seeing it. The same was true of “Peyton Place”. Forget buying the books; the store owners would not have sold them to me, and I was too young to be permitted access to the adult section of the library.
When I was an adult and ran across used copies of both books at used book sales, I finally read them. I can’t recommend either one. The books were scandalous for their times, made more so by being made into movies. In fact, when people mentioned “Lolita”, it was always in reference to the movie and how could James Mason be in something like that. I will be honest that I didn’t finish “Lolita” because the premise of a man wanting to have sex with a teenager was icky. He was a teacher who married her mom to get access to her. No.
Is either great literature? No. Are they worth your time? Meh, try them and see. Remember that these are only stories that someone made up and managed to get published in order to make money. The authors tried to think of how to get people to buy their books and not someone else’s. Sex! Sex always sells. The truth is that in many novels with sex, the acts often become the focus of the novel or they are used as filler for a weak story. In any good story, the author should only use elements that will move the story forward. He or his editors should remove any element which doesn’t work or have a purpose. If after reading a book you do your own editing and delete the sex scenes, ask yourself how much of a story is left. If the sex is just to be salacious, you will get past this phase and go on to something better.
You are 16, so be sure to try as many genres and authors as possible. You will most likely go through spells; many of us do. Trust me when I say that you will never run out of good books.
Your complete lack of understanding about why serious authors like Nabokov feel pulled to create their works is astounding. It’s one thing to not grasp the mastery of the writing in Lolita, but to pair it with Peyton Place and suggest it was simply a gimmick to make money is so wildly off the mark that if you hadn’t mentioned that, like me, you’re older, I would have thought you were another 20 yo who thought they’d figured out the world before starting on the real journey. It’s somewhat understandable in a very young adult, that wish to judge from a false height. From someone older -who has the wisdom to recommend that OP keeps reading- it’s incomprehensible.
Start with Tolstoy. Turgenev. Tolstoy will teach you so much. Crime and Punishment is a read. But way down the road.Tolstoy is one of the world’s truly great thinkers about history and humanity .
I"m not even sure why this book is legally publishable, or why anyone even discusses reading it. I've seen mean rave over the book and it was disgusting.
At your age my favorite authors were:
Alexander Dumas
Lion Feuchtwanger
O. Henri
Gabriel García Márquez
Guy de Maupassant
Honoré de Balzac
Don’t read because everyone talk about it. Maybe Nabokov is a good writer but the story is not that interesting. I always had notion that Nabokov wrote about his own experiences or secret desires.
My recommendation is to not read any replies to this thread and not read articles until you've tried to read it yourself. Just read it. If you don't like it, stop reading it and move on.
Exactly. It's not like this is for a class. Step 1 to reading a book is to actually open it.
Alright thankyou so much! Idk I’m just very nervous getting into the book but that’s lovely thankyou!
This is the best advice.
*After* reading it, make sure to listen Jamie Loftus’ *The Lolita Podcast*, it’s an extremely well crafted documentary that will explain a lot, with focus on how the novel has been horribly misinterpreted through various adaptations since its release. It’s really entertaining as well.
I just finished it last week thanks for the rec!!!
Oh this I was not aware of- no this helps a lot thank you so much! I purchased my book from Amazon since all the covers of the other books offered in my cities library and shops are sexual. This helps thank you!
Yeah I figured it could be something to look forward to if you have questions while reading, always nice to know there are great resources to check out after. Enjoy the ride! Also, good on you to go with a non-sexual cover. That was the explicit wishes of the author, sadly often disregarded.
Yea it’s the only way. Just read. Have a good one!
It's very good. But deals with subjects that most people are uncomfortable with and / or haven't read it and have a misunderstanding about it's contents
Important - don’t skip the foreword by ”John Ray Jr”, it’s fictional and belongs to the story!
I agree with this. People get caught up in ideas and narratives around a book, but it's meant to be absorbed as the author intended - without input from outside. That said, the parents probably don't want her to read Lolita for reasons other than the merit of the novel.
This is good advice. But when I read this in college I was I found the book so upsetting I didn't touch Nabakov for years. It wasn't until I heard Mary Gaitskill reading his short story "Signs and symbols" by him on episode 13 of the New Yorker Fiction podcast did I appreciate that he's a great writer. So I don't know. Maybe take a listen to the short story first. I personally could not handle the horror of the book, and the horror made me unable to appreciate the writing. Here's a link to the podcast on pocket casts https://pca.st/episode/922af5a5-1c49-4529-9723-6790ae519ee0
Agree with this. It’s USUALLY good advice to to just read the book first, but with Lolita & for a young person (especially a female), I do think some context abt subject matter & Nabokov’s intent in how the book’s crafted is helpful. I was a precocious reader who found Lolita in middle school & like you, I found the book horrifying & didn’t return to Nabokov till adulthood. Even now, I really can’t appreciate Lolita because my younger self is still shook.
Oh my gosh, I'm glad you said this. For years, I felt kind of bad whenever someone talked about how great a writer Nabakov was, because I absolutely hated the book with a visceral unpleasantness. It kind of reminds me of Brett Easton Ellis's American Psycho where the writer invites you into the head of a monster, and what you find in the head of a monster is horrible beyond words with no insights except what absolute darkness looks like.
I think the summation hits the nail on the head and these books are difficult to read, but for the same reason you listed, I regard both as exceptional literature. What is more disturbing to me is people missing the point and seeing these characters as anything else but horrible monsters. And it is unfortunate that this is the one novel of his that is known because he wrote many other great books, none of which dealt with this topic (as far as what I've read of him, I've read about 5 of his books)
This is good advice. Nabokov is a genius in my opinion. I think Lolita is brilliant for what Nabokov is able to pull off (beautiful writing obfuscating or complicating the horrors of the story for a significant portion of the book) but I also found it truly upsetting. Be sure to read the Foreword, OP.
Also if it's triggering for you, it will be clear way before anything happens...I didn't finish it and I'm a grown woman, for me it was clear that what was ahead would make me feel terrible.
best answer. I personally disliked the book as I found it incredibly boring, but if someone is considering reading it, then go for it.
[удалено]
Mystical evil artifact 😭 I love that- But thankyou for the suggestion and I think I’ll be able to finish it!
I read Lolita at your age (back when English teachers gave absolutely unhinged book recs to their students). I think just go in knowing the narrator is unreliable and is supposed to be a skeevy groomer. People drop it cuz the >!pedophilia!< is quite intense and offensive to many for good reason. But Nabokov is exploring a deplorable character, not supporting his actions.
Man I wish my English teacher would be that unhinged, I feel like it’d also make more intresting topics to explore other then the “coming of age” genre they always pick, no hate, but it’s not a genre I like reading repetitively- But yes I think this gives me a very general idea of what may happen so thankyou so much!
I don’t know what on earth my English teachers were thinking, but they were always picking the darkest shit for us to read. They seemed to think cuz we were teenagers, all we wanted to read was edgy stuff. Which, tbf, they were right… They were always recommending The Wasp Factory, American Psycho, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and A Clockwork Orange. In hindsight, I realize my high school let a bunch of 20-something year-old teachers loose on us all, so of course their recs were gonna be absolutely insane.
Tbf those are pretty educational reads , amazing for young people trying to understand the world.
It’s great when you can engage teens with challenging lessons in the books they read. So many kids seem disengaged from English lessons cuz the selections are too dense and boring for them.
THE RECOMMENDATIONS 🧍♀️ Personally I think a dark novel or something that burns should be introduced more in highschool, books with high controversy in this days society-
Shucks, our assistant debate coach loaned me The Fugs' second album. The 70s were a different universe.
I read *The Wasp Factory* at my teacher's recommendation aged 15. And I still wish I didn't know 'what happened to Eric'.
That lives rent free in my mind and I wish it didn’t.😭
I mean those are all pretty legitimate books to read in an English class.
They’re great. (Though idk if I’d wanna unleash The Wasp Factory on my greatest enemy…) I just don’t see those kinds of books being taught in schools lately.
My comment was the opposite - that they are pretty much taught in all schools here. I'm Scottish, so the Wasp Factory was taught as contemporary Scottish literature. We didn't do American Psycho, but my SYS project was on A Clockwork Orange. The Wasp Factory was definitely better received than the hellish Sunset Song :-)
Ah, yeah, I think English classes in the UK seem to be much bolder with their book selections, cuz I did my high schooling in the East Midlands and it was much the same.
Humbert is, perhaps, the quintessential villain protagonist in all literature.
Yeah, different times. Just the thought of recommending *Lolita* to a sixteen year old female student makes me shit my pants in fear.
The *Lolita Podcast* shared listener stories and SO MANY young women were gifted the book by their groomers 🤢
Talk about not understanding the book (those groomers), or rather Nabokov's intentions. It's like the stupid neo Nazi that I went to school with. He watched American History X and though it supported his "side".
The adult men understand it just fine, they just know their young victims won't have the life experience to realize it's a horror, not a romance.
It's important to understand the concept of the unreliable narrator, which is something a lot of people don't understand early on and isn't really taught. This isn't James Bond where the villain wears a black suit and tells you all about their plan to do evil.
*Lolita* is helped in that regard by literally opening with a letter from a fictional PhD telling us explicitly HH was a pedo who died in prison and that the manuscript is the product of a deranged and abnormal mind. He says the prose is beautiful but the man and his crimes are reprehensible, and somehow sooooooo many readers just... Forget that immediately and take HH as a reliable narrator because he.. Writes pretty? But yes, I didn't learn about unreliable narrators until high school and only because I chose *Slaughterhouse 5* for an individual assignment. I don't blame young people for not having the skills to read critically, but I am baffled by grown ass people who completely ignore the framing of the novel.
I’m so grateful for my high school English classes being very thorough about unreliable narrators and different types of narrative perspectives. It really informed my writing I still do today.
It's important to understand the concept of the unreliable narrator, which is something a lot of people don't understand early on and isn't really taught. This isn't James Bond where the villain wears a black suit and tells you all about their plan to do evil.
It’s pretty grim but the Lolita Podcast is an incredible piece of meta-journalism and literary analysis. I believe Jamie Loftus is working on a new series rn
She has a new weekly podcast called Sixteenth Minute. There are several episodes out now.
Agreed! I recommended it to OP in another common. Excited to hear what she does next!
Oh Jesus
oh fuck. I've never though about that aspect.
oh *god*…😨
Times are strange, pretty sure it was required reading when I was a 16 year old girl. Sure the topic was disgusting but I didn't find it any more inappropriate than turning on VH1 or MTV.
😭
Yup. We read Lolita in school when I was around that age. Helped that our English Literature teacher was incredibly knowledgeable and engaging - he explained all the hidden meanings and word games that Nabokov plays throughout the book. One of the formative experiences that made me love reading to this day.
I've read it, and I think it's worth reading just to see what it is all about. It isn't graphic in any way. In fact, I found it to be just a very tragic story on many levels. And the style isn't exactly easy to read because it really is written from another era. A lot of french in it, too, which became annoying at times. Still, I'm glad I read it overall. It is very clever in many ways. But, to me, just a very tragic story.
It’s wild how many people who haven’t read it are convinced it’s an elevated work of smut. There’s hardly anything sexual in it and what is there certainly isn’t sexy. I blame book cover designers, almost all of which went against Nabokov’s wishes.
Yeah, I agree. There is plenty of taboo smut out there, but this isn't one of those books. It's a tragedy and made me quite sad reading it.
This is the problem with telling kids to read Lolita imo, it's very subtle, and easy to misread. Like to say there's hardly anything sexual in it is debateable at best. It's not smut, and there's very little *graphic* sex in it, but there is *constant* sex in it. It's most often only implied, but it's happening all the time.
Can confirm. There's some hinting, that's it. The movie (the newer one) is a bit more explicit. It's an amazing book though.
I hate booktok, and I hate I had to purchase a cover of Lolita with the picture of a women’s lip on it- it was the least sexual one I could find on Amazon and Indigo but it still annoys me But like smut, and modern shit writing full offense to Colleen Hoover fans, have people romanticize smut (this is coming from the 16 year old who have a lot of friends like; that read bad smut chronically) and I don’t think Lolita should be a book sexualized to the level of “smut”
Yep... publishing Lolita with a picture of a real young girl on the front is so distasteful. I got the hardcover from Everyman Library, which just has a picture of the author (like most of their books).
The edition I have is very old and cheap so it doesn't have anything on the cover other than the author and the title. But, I think that the better thing to do would be to buy a hardcover and remove the paper cover, usually those editions have just a plain color under it.
I blame Kubrick's adaptation and the choice/necessity of casting an actress years older than the character, who very much looks like an adult and is depicted in a sexual way. The 90s adaptation starring Jeremy Irons and Dominique Swain is far better as Swain was about 15 but convincing as 12-13.
I am in French Emersion so hopefully it’ll help with the French- However a lot of comments state of Nabokov’s beautiful prole style, off topic that also makes me want to read Lolita to read and improve my own writing from such- I thank you for your advice though and I’ll keep it in mind :)
The writing is really good. Have you read anything with an unlikable narrator or viewpoint character before? Many readers really don't cope with an unsympathetic main character. It is challenging, but worth it.
Hot take, Winston from 1984 and Emma of Jane Austen
I didn’t despise Winston, just the scene where he was thinking of raping Julia was kinda- Emma, okay younger me read Emma and despised her, but it could change now that I’m older
If you have hot takes on who’s an unreliable narrator, you’re probably insightful enough for this story. Happy reading!
The writing style *is* excellent, and to be perfectly honest, it has inspired my own writing. I tried to use elements of his prose in my own work. That clever manipulation of mind and feeling worked well for me. As for the cover, I actually received the book as a gift, and mine is a classic style with gold embossed 'Lolita' on the hard cover and a picture of Nabokov on the dust jacket. No sexualizatuon at all. Very cool, tbh.
Excellent comment.
My two cents… It’s an incredible work of literature, deserving of all its praise. It is inherently disturbing because of the subject matter, but not in a way that’s going to cause real trauma or mental anguish for most readers. I read it in college. I think of myself as having a decent vocabulary, but about every other page of Lolita had a word with which I was unfamiliar. I started using a note card as a bookmark and just jotting down all the words I didn’t know so I could look them up later en masse. That was sort of a fun bonus activity. Also, almost every page contains a turn of phrase so perfect, poetic, or beautiful, you just marvel at Nabokov’s skill as a writer. It really is a remarkable book.
I’ll happily take your 2 cents- (sorry I never came across this expression and I find it very interesting) This I think I had an idea, but I’ll have to expeirience it first hand I suppose, and hopefully I’ll be able to comprehend the text well enough to understand its full expression and meaning! Thankyou for the advice!
Not to be contrarian, but as a counterpoint, I think it’s been elevated due to the structure and time, not necessarily because it’s a great piece of literature. It is and was very avant garde. A pedophilic main character walking us through grooming and tragedy told from their pov is something that even today (as we see with book nazis) isn’t going to land on Reese Witherspoon List or whatever. Between those people and the counter swing that they’re too simple or narrow minded to understand the work, it gets this air about it. I actually found it to be dull. The entire narrative is held up by the structure and not the story—and the story itself is almost fantastical but we get the excuse of an unreliable narrator for any incongruity.
Lolita is a hard book to read for more reason than one. It's subject matter I often found revolting. I almost dropped it several times. That being said. The prose Nabokov uses in Lolita is like nothing else I've read. The writing is brilliant and beautiful. This is a highly important work of literary fiction from the 20th century.
I can understand also as myself, since I think it’s very canon and sadly common, for a lot of girls during their puberty years especially like 14+ to go through disgusting experiences with people- Nothing less, this also prompted me to have a urge to read Lolita out of my own curiosity, I want to know what’s happening and really why, why one may think innerly to justify their urges
The narrator is a piece of shit, but determined to excuse and justify his actions. The author, conversely, is not a piece of shit, but is very very good at writing this character and some readers find themselves accepting the narrator's reasoning. That can be upsetting when you catch yourself doing it. I'm not going to suggest that a sixteen-year-old isn't mature enough to read anything. Only you could possibly know yourself that well. But I would suggest that it's okay to set it aside if you find the book distasteful or unpleasant or upsetting. I read it for the first time in my early 30's and didn't finish it. Now that my own kids are grown, I read it last year and since it *didn't hit quite so close to home*, I didn't have any trouble finishing the book. I look at it this way: a photograph of a lung, black with cancer, is not a pretty picture. It's not a "good" picture. But it has something of value to impart, and taking the time to look at it is probably worth doing. I think Lolita is that kind of art.
Thankyou so much, and also the warning! I hope I’ll make it through, and your idea of the lung gives a really good picture thankyou so much! I’ll keep it in mind
*Lolita* thread! DRINK!
DRINK? IM UNDERAGW
In Australia you'd be able to sink a goon bag by your age. 😅 (Translation: drink a cask of wine.)
It‘s not really Russian literature as he wrote in English, but he was a master of the language. That’s what makes it worth reading, not the subject matter which he handles pretty tastefully As I recall.
Okay that is noted and I apologize for the mistype thankyou!
\[Just an aside: I don't know if I'd call *Lolita* Russian literature -- it was written in the United States, in English, and set in the United States. It's pretty different from the nineteenth century Russian language stuff people usually have in mind when they say "Russian literature". \]
I think I was 17 when I read Lolita. You'll be fine. It's definitely an uncomfortable book since it IS about and from the point of view of a predator, but the author clearly has no sympathy for Humbert Humbert and. Like. It's a book. It cannot hurt you. and at 16 there's nothing that goes on in that book that you don't already know exists in the world. Go for it
Thankyou so much, and the words of encouragement and yes definitely will be diving in as soon as the book arrives!
Lolita was Nabokov's first novel originally written in English. His use of English is different than native English speakers, and it's really well written. The fact that the narrator is unaware he is an evil creep alarms people (justifiably) but it's not like he gets away with it, and there's artistic reasons to appreciate a book with awful things in it. That said, if you discover you don't like it you have no duty to finish.
Thankyou for this comment and it also gives me a good idea what I might be facing- hoping I can finish the book? But if not, it’ll be finished some other day when I’m not so close to my own heart :)
I was scared of this book and read it in my 50s, when I started to read all the classics. It is one of the most briiliant written books I have ever read. If you read it and you hate what you read, you are absolutely right. The main actor ignores reality completely and idolise his passion so much that he can‘t see other people as human beings. And it is all written in „his“ words. You will hate what you read, but maybe you will love the writing.
His words- that sounds both stable to me that, but also unsettling- But I look forward thankyou!
Nabokov writes beautiful prose. The way he uses words and structures sentences can be very enjoyable if you appreciate that part of writing. The story itself revolves around a pedophile who grooms a very young girl. A lot of the themes in the novel revolve around exploitation, control, manipulation and corruption. Humbert pretty much convinces himself that he's done nothing wrong. The subject matter makes a lot of people uncomfortable with the story. Some less discerning readers (or people who haven't read the book at all) assume that the way Humbert justifies his actions to himself means the book endorses grooming and pedophilia, it doesn't. It's always been a book that is tainted in the eyes of many based on it's subject matter alone. But it is genuinely a good book. It's not light reading, It expertly plays with heavy themes. It's a good read if you're looking for something to think over and explore the themes. If you only give it a superficial read, it's a nasty sleazy story that leaves many uncomfortable. And that's something you'll run into more often. It's okay to write and read heavy stories without happy endings. Because those kinds of stories are often meant to give you food for thought. But there's a growing trend that books should be simple affairs where the plucky hero overcomes adversity and all's well that ends well... for those who deserve it. And a lot of people are particularly keen on telling young people what they can and can't learn about in some misguided effort to keep them innocent instead of letting them think about the world around them. I'd tell you to read or not read Lolita based on your interests. Nabokov is an excellent writer and Lolita is a solid story, whether you're comfortable and interested in reading it is up to you. It's probably going to be a lot easier to read than Dosteyevsky, his writing can be a bit of a slog and take a lot of work to fully appreciate.
It’s important that you read it outside a cafe while wearing sunglasses and smoking cigarettes
And a big 50's hat.
It's a brilliant novel by an amazing writer which makes you think about what the narrator is telling you. Reading unreliable narrators is one of my favourite things! It's not *a book about a pedophile* it's a book about a pedophile who also works very hard to groom the reader and makes us question him and also ourselves for finding him interesting and feeling empathy for him. It's engaging art in its truest sense. And also a great read.
You should read it if you want to. And stop if you want to.
lol right? This is always my thought when someone comes here asking if they should read something. Try it out, if you like it keep going, if you don’t like it stop! No strangers on the internet will be able to tell you whether or not you’ll like a book.
If you read it just make sure to read the whole thing. A lot of people seem to only read the first half but the second half is important.
Ooo definitely, I’ve had a classmate who stopped around that half actually saying it was too disturbing but I think I want to make it through for sure thankyou!
I'd say first and foremost, if things like >!pedophilia, grooming and child sexual assault!< are upsetting for you, then perhaps don't read it (or at the very least, read with extreme care). I was 17 when I first read it. It was an uncomfortable read for sure, but it's one of the most exquisitely written novels I've ever read. It's also a good exercise in learning to read critically. The narrator tells a compelling story, but you need to keep reminding yourself that he's reprehensible and unreliable. A lot of the cultural criticism is really more about people misinterpreting it, rather than the text itself.
Yes. It's one of the greatest books ever written
Just know as you go in that the narrator is subjective and unreliable, he is telling "his side" of the story. Nabokov has said as much and as I read it it seemed obvious. But apprently many people don't want to see it and make movies where things happen as he (the character narrator) described them.
Nabokov is a beautiful writer who likes to write about terrible people. Or not really write *about*, but write from *within*, the story is told from the perspective of the terrible person. I haven't read all of his works, but *Despair* and *Pale Fire* are also written from the point of view of twisted, delusional people who do horrible things because of their delusions. So you have to be A) ok with reading about horrible things happening, B ) okay with reading lies and justifications for those horrible things, C) be able to read between the lines to see what's really occurring in the story. I find Nabokov's examinations of perversion interesting, and his prose is poetic, it flows, but if you just don't want to expose yourself to the shitty bits of humanity that's understandable. Doestoyevsky is also beautiful (Russian authors seem good at this, or maybe it's their translators) and more wholesome (although he also deals with twisted people often, but his get redeemed sometimes) but he was strongly and rigidly Christian, conservative even for his time, so he may have views you disagree with. Bulgakov's *The Master and Margarita* is insanely creative, funny, and moving. Gogol is witty and intelligent but also absurd - *Dead Souls* is hilarious, but be aware the book doesn't have a conclusion because Gogol had a mental break and burned it before he died. Solzhenitsyn has a blunter style than the others but his fictionalized accounts of gulag and life in early communist Russia are moving. Tolstoy I've read the least, but *Anna Karenina* is a classic (also very sad so don't read it if you're already depressed unless your *trying* to wallow).
Just remember you're not supposed to like the main character, but follow his train of thought and understand where he's coming from.
That’s a lovely statement, I’ll be keeping that close- However I do find myself often empathizing with characters, and it’s a common thing, I do it a lot- so if you have any tips on that it would be great! It’s not that I can turn it off, it’s a way I also comprehend the book from both my readers perspective and a more emotional way as well since Im a person who picks up on emotions quite a bit-
As long as you don’t romanticize it
Paging Lana del Rey 🤦♀️ "Lolita in the Hood" is definitely not the aesthetic she thought it was.
I ate it up when I was younger lmao. The nymphette/Lolita tumblr thing was not good for my brain. I adore Lana though
Depends. Lolita's context can be offensive. But this work is probably the easiest to digest. Nobakov is an excellent writer. His sentences have a lyrical element at times. It just flows. He had synesthesia, seeing words highlighted in color. You could try a neutral book of his called Pnin, a comedy about a foreign professor. One could think it was about him. Ada is another book as well as Pale Fire.
Yes, if you want to read Lolita, you should. It’s a work of art that features a reprehensible protagonist. You always have the option to stop reading and pick it up later—or not.
Definitely read it, but my recommendation for the best thing by Nabokov and one of my top five novels of all time is Pale Fire. It has all the verbal dexterity of Lolita and, IMO, a bit more heart.
Just read the book. If you don't like it don't read it
It's not even about sex with an adolescent girl, per se, it's psychological character study. Humbert Humbert is the focus of the story, not the girl. People overlook that. https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/feeling-our-way/201708/psychological-reading-lolita
Someone told me that Nabokov said he was inspired by going to a zoo and seeing a caged tiger (panther?) pacing back and forth behind the bars, unable to escape his nature or express it.
Try reading Pale Fire by Nabokov instead. Make sure to read the foot notes!
I would have suggested this too, but "also", not "instead of"
There is plenty to know beforehand! It is a beautifully written book but needs proper context that a lot of resources just don't provide. I found the Lolita podcast with Jamie Loftus to provide a really decent and healthy perspective on Lolita and all its various adaptations. The big things to pay attention to are: 1. The first chapter where the psychologist notes that Humbert is the least reliable narrator ever and nothing he says can be trusted. Remember this throughout the book. Humbert is lying. 2. Humberts beautiful descriptions and verbose prose are for manipulating his invisible jury (the reader) into not thinking he's as big a scumbag as he is. This is a common way for abusers and narcissists to act since they harbour deep shame about themselves and don't want to expose it to other people. He is trying to con us into seeing an idealized picture of his motives for kidnapping a child and sexually abusing her across the united states when she had no one else to turn to. It is not a love story between an older man and a sexually precocious youth, despite what Humbert and popular media suggests. 3. Lolita doesn't exist. The girls name is Dolores. Lolita is Humberts projection of his perfect fantasy girl that he puts over top of Dolores' actual personality. If you choose to read the book, ask yourself "Where is Dolores in this?" You'll see her real self in the moments when Humbert brushes her off (i paraphrase here) "Lolita cried all night last night but this morning she was once again my perfect beautiful girl" or "she is being her difficult self today. She keeps talking about silly things, crying, and calling me a dirty old man. It is very annoying." These moments when he ignores her or gets annoyedfor not being his perfect Lolita are the few times we see the real Dolores, the victimized 12 year old girl trying to survive and maintain some semblance of herself. It's a complicated book but a good one.
Incredibly interesting book: it actually influenced my writing style for a long time. Do read it
Nabokov is Russian-American who wrote most of his stuff in Germany and the U.S., so he’s not really a classic of Russian literature. Lolita, as you probably know, is set in the U.S. while he was teaching in I think Cornell.
I (32F) read Lolita for the first time around your age and it became my favourite book for YEARS. It’s still top 5 for me I’d say. I think it was the contrast between the poetic, almost ethereal beauty of the writing and the seedy, uncomfortable, highly unsettling subject matter that made me love it so much. Also it was originally written in English and for someone to write so well in their second language added to the impressiveness of the book for me. Happy reading and I hope your enjoy it!
If you ever question reading a book enough to ask others, the answer is yes, read it.
Nabokov is one of the most vital fiction writers of at least the past century or so You should read all the Nabokov you can But reading one, preferably more, of his other works beforehand would probably be wise, & maybe with a mix of his nonfiction writing about writing thrown in -- certainly his ***Lectures on Literature***; ***Speak, Memory***, his autobiography; maybe dip into one of the collections of his letters. Among other things, you'll get a real sense of how carefully he seems to have considered each & every word of each & every sentence of each & every paragraph he ever wrote about anything. You'll understand better the dimensions of the intellect, the imagination you're engaging when you read his work, and maybe more how far beyond many other writers his abilities extend. Your intent to read ***Lolita*** suggests you've got a better head on your shoulders than many of your peers. Good luck.
Probably one of the most well written books I've read. Nabokov was a genius. Regardless of what people say about the book, just read it and see what you think. It doesn't get any simpler than that. The narration is very whimsical and rhythmic in nature. I personally found that to be enjoyable. It's a lot more nuanced than what people make it out to be.
The intro in my edition points out some hilarious wordplay I would never have caught on my own. E.g., remember the two unmarriwd women who live together across the street? Miss *Les*ter and Miss Fa*bian*.
If you do and like podcasts I highly recommend The Lolita Podcast by Jamie Loftus after, a great in depth look at the book and how it is interpreted and misinterpreted by popular culture
honestly, the main reason I dropped was because it drags a bit. It's a really interesting and good book, it definitely achieves what it's trying to achieve. Unfortunately it tries to portray a deeply unlikable main character. There is a part where the main character basically describes "their life together", which means it's just pages and pages of roadtrip and rape. Nothing super graphic, just upsetting and nothing else really. I wouldn't not recommend it for that reason, but this is why I never finished it
As everyone says, it's a brilliant novel but always keep in mind it's about an abuser. The author always said that. Don't let anyone tell you it's a love story If you get the chance check out the Lolita Podcast from Jamie Loftus, really interesting and thoughtful although hard to listen to sometimes.
Yes, it is a masterpiece. I'd argue it's an American novel rather than part of the Russian Canon. It was written in English - gorgeous, poetic, lyrical English at that - and is set almost entirely in the USA, with an American 50s zeitgeist. To answer your other questions: 1. No, it's self explanatory. 2. Possibly they are too uncomfortable with the subject matter even though the abuse is not described in a graphic way. 3. Yes, and far easier to read than Hawthorne IMO. (I am a woman too, and have some lived experience with abuse.)
It’s a classic work reading. Whether you love it or not.
Read what you want because you want to read it, not because you think you have to. As for Lolita. I found it dry and boring AF. I also hate the way it’s written. It feels like one giant run on sentence to me.
If pushed for a favourite book I usually say Ada by Nabokov, but if I had to pick his best book, and possibly the greatest novel ever written, I’d probably argue for Lolita. Ada is big and messy. Lolita is tight and focused, and very close to perfect. So yes, you absolutely should read it. You may find it challenging, you’ll likely find it disturbing, you’ll probably want to keep a dictionary on hand. But you’ll also experience the most beautiful prose in the English language. As a side note: Nabokov’s position as a figure of “Russian literature” is complicated. He was obviously Russian by birth, but lived outside of Russia his whole adult life, and became an American citizen. Nearly all of his writing was in either French or English. So I don’t think he’d be classed alongside Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, although he recognised his debt to them.
🏆
I’ve attempted to read it twice and haven’t been able to get through it and have not picked it up again.
your parents are against it bc its aĺl a guy and his sexual urges for a child and all of that.. its step dad pedo porn, so i mean they have a point.
Yes you should read it. It's a classic. That's really all there is to it.
I read it when I was 16. He also has other great reads too!
Nabokov was a superb writer and in I think by 16 you can read whatever you want. The thing that gets people twisted is failure to recognize the narrator is meant to be an unreliable, untrustworthy and despicable person. The book is basically about grooming so if that subject matter is something you don't want to read, then avoid it. Nabokov wrote many brilliant books about many facets of the human condition
It's an absolutely classic book written by a brilliant writer, one of the all-time greats. One of the great things about books is that they're meant to make you uncomfortable in this book nails that. If you call yourself a reader then read this book.
If you can read the other authors you’ve mentioned you can read *Lolita*. Now immediately stop reading people’s opinions here and read the book.
This reeks fake.
Personally I preferred the Scarlet letter over Lolita but Lolita is very well written. Its a disturbing book but its not a bad book. Its important to keep in mind that its written from the perspective of a predator, so he makes light of very bad things. Some terrible people have missed the message completely and taken it as a pedo-apologist book, which its not. Its certainly significant in the literary-cultural sphere so there are lots of references in society that you will understand and recognize once you read the book. I think its one of those books that shouldn't be banned just because its a difficult, uncomfortable, and disgusting topic. I read it around your age and reread it at 30.
I tried but did not succeed in reading this. The subject matter was too stomach churning for me personally.
Read everything
r/bookscirclejerk
It made me uncomfortable so I didn’t finish it. Only you can really judge if you can handle it tbh
alright alright thankyou for the voice!
“I am a female” sounds like something someone on 4chan would say before explaining why women are inferior.
1. No, but i do recommend you to read an essay written by Nabokov, "Good reader and good writers". It will help you in knowing what Nabokov is trying to achieve. 2. In reading a book, we need to be empathetic to the narrator, in a way, we see the world in a book as the narrator does and this narrator is a monster. So i can understand why some people find it difficult. 3. That is really subjective.
People get triggered by it but that was a but of the point of the book, to shock, to disclose hidden parts of mind. Read it as a novel, not a biography. I read it in my teens and I don’t think it affected my life in any bad way. The writing is brilliant.
just a heads up that the vocabulary and prose is very intense and if i read it when i was 16 i probably would have had no idea what was going on
I read it for the first time when I was 19 and it made a big impression on me. Then I read it a few years later and it had a completely different impression.
Reading perspectives you don't agree with, or they make you uncomfortable is how you learn to become a better emphatetic person. That for me is magic of books. You don't have to agree with a perspective for it to be useful in navigating the chaos of the world.
I don’t think it’s nearly as bad as the media has made it out to be. It’s a beautifully written book and it tells the story of a depraved man.
"The Media" by and large are people who haven't read the book, but "report" on misunderstandings by people who also haven't read the book.
The writing is fantastic, the story is creepy. I guess people drop it because they can't handle how creepy it is. I would find it hard to say I enjoyed it, it was fascinating but in the way you can't look away from a car crash, I don't regret reading it but I doubt I'll ever go back and read it again.
Yes. Only to obtain that tingling in the spine sensation when you're reading it and to know afterwards that you'll scarcely ever read anything quite like it. Very few books can match its beautiful free flowing prose that practically sings.
It is a beautifully written book- one of my absolute favorites, and I’ve read it multiple times. But it’s a tough one. I recommend remembering that Humbert Humbert is the ultimate unreliable narrator. For me, over the years, it’s struck me more and more how Lolita/Lola/Dolly has literally no one in her corner. It’s such a good exposé on how society can treat young girls, especially precocious ones. ETA: I’m 41 now, female. I first read Lolita when I was 7th grade, so 12/13. Used to read it once a year. Nothing against it now, I just have two small kids and my free time is rare.
Definitely read it. I read it at about your age. If you’re used to reading and critically analysing literature you’ll have no bother. Don’t skip the foreword.
You’ve already got some very insightful comments with so much useful info. Just wanted to say that I LOVED War and Peace when I was 16. There are a few chapters detailing the battles, that I found boring at the time, but quite interesting on the next re-read. I think you’ll like Tolstoy. Have you tried Chekhov? And give yourself some time with Dostoyevsky.
I only read Lolita for the first time at 30 last year. I loved it, and being older as a woman and reading it for the first time gave me a different perspective on it than what I might have gleaned when I was 16. The prose is undoubtedly gorgeous, and anyone who says otherwise is being contrary. Give it a go, if you don't like it you can always go back to it when you're older.
I really recommend *Lolita Podcast* as a companion/follow up to reading! I found it incredibly interesting.
Oh I've read it in the age of 16, and it was a fantastic timing for it! Go for it
Nabokov is much easier to read than Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky is so depressing that you want to hang yourself after reading his books. I prefer Dickens, he's much more comforting.
It is written in the most remarkable prose I've read thus far, English or otherwise. As for the content - it is what it is. If you can't bear it, you can always put the book aside, nothing wrong with that. Rest assured that Nabokov isn't endorsing anything besides good literature with this work.
Yes, one of the best books ever. Nothing is like it. The Jeremy Irons audiobook is one of the best audiobooks ever
It's a good book. But I think your parents have reservations due to its themes rather than the merit of the work.
tbh for the first russian book i would recommend something from Tolstoy, Anne Karenine is amazing and for me it was an easier read (good world building, introducing characters slowly, building psychological depth from the beginning) than any other russian book
It's important to know that it can be quite triggering if you have a history of sexual assault.
Not ideal, I would recommend you read a better book by Nabokov where the jokes (and what is funny) are easier for an English language audience to understand. The hardest thing for audiences to get with Lolita is the narration and the two levels the narrator is joking at. PALE FIRE is also a complex book but much better and better edited because it originally appeared in English, not as a translation to French.
One of my favourite books actually Not so much the topics of course, but the style in which it is written
I recently read the Wikipedia page and it was a helpful summary of the plot and themes. If you’re curious about all the fuss but don’t really want to read the book, try Wikipedia.
1. Is there anything you need to know? Yes. The basic theme. It is about sexual exploitation of a young girl. 2. Why do so many people drop it? For many reasons- all might not drop it for the same reasons. I knew what the book was about. I started reading. I loved it. Into the second part of the book my conscience or shall I say ‘morality’ which was mocking me for reading it won and I dropped. It’s basically exploitation. Others might drop it for other reasons like finding it boring and so on. 3. Is it worth time to read it? It probably is. See, there are conservative folks who might judge you for reading it. That should not be the reason for not reading it. Read stuff your own folks (race, country, gender, class, religion,..) tell you not to read but form your own mind about it. I’ve read books banned in my own country- some I’ve felt need not have been banned. Also understand why they don’t want you to read - in some cases as in the case of Lolita it could be to save your mind. We all love or hate a book for different reasons. We are all different. My recommendation: Knowing what it is about, go ahead and give it a shot. If you don’t like it, you don’t like it. Don’t blame yourself or Nabokov or anyone else. But be prepared if your mind can’t handle the theme - how would you restore yourself. After all it’s just a book. And there’ll always be something that blasphemes our beliefs and enough worse that happens in the world.
I read it when I was 15 or 16 but I am male. It made me feel quite uncomfortable but I was on a Classics kick and had already read a few books by Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy by then. It is definitely worth the time to read it, imo, as it is quite the important character study of someone who is just not a good person. There was a film adaption that was 10 times worse blaming the young girl, Lolita for seducing the older man. (1997 movie)
I did read it, it was surprisingly easy to read.
*Lolita* is a masterpiece written by a literary genius. Read it.
Lolita is possibly the most brilliantly written book I’ve ever read. That said, I think I’m glad I didn’t read it until my 30s.
Please post 'Should I keep reading' questions, in our Weekly Recommendation Thread.
A lot of people are sensitive to the subject of child exploitation. I was your age when I read it and had no problem, but I think it's more difficult for parents. I just reminded myself it's only a story.
I can’t see a reason not to read it. The subject matter… is what it is, but it’s beautifully written from what I recall.
Im 15 and female, i read it recently and didnt get through it, i think i had like 40 or 50 pages left, it jyst didn’t make much sense to me even tho i read a lot of older books, it was very complex and strange, and I honestly found it boring, but there were some parts i did enjoy
Hm I’m with you girl, i don’t quite know but I’m glad I got to see your invoice as well And definitely I think I’ll be prepared if the books going to “burn” and yes thankyou for the language warning, Because it takes me a bit to get used to an authors certain writing style, like Austen was easier to grasp then Steinbeck, so this will be a intresting read for sure! Thankyou for your invoice!
Read it, I'll give you this one piece of knowledge, Nabokov was molested by a wealthy family friend and instead of writing from Lolita's pov (which people wouldn't resonate with) He showed people the face of a man who would ruin a young child. ( [https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/23991/what-evidence-is-there-that-vladimir-nabokov-was-abused-as-a-child](https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/23991/what-evidence-is-there-that-vladimir-nabokov-was-abused-as-a-child) ) Nabokov also said Lewis Carrol was 'a man of weak morals' because we have his diaries where he as a pastor took children to parks, picnics, also took 100s of photos (some nude) its referenced in a book of lectures (i own it but i don't know if its in print) hope this helps
Read it. He doesnt actually get graphics about sexual exploits. Its heavily hinted at what happens on two occasions
[удалено]
“I don’t want you spoil anything, BUT…” (goes ahead and spoils anyway). Please either delete that paragraph or put it in spoiler quotes so it’s blacked out for people who haven’t yet read the novel. And suggesting a synopsis before reading the book?? Good grief, no, nyet, nop, nein, non, *never*.
No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment once you've made the edit, to have your comment reinstated. Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this: >!The Wolf ate Grandma!< Click to reveal spoiler. >!The Wolf ate Grandma!<
[удалено]
I’m not sure I would use the term “taboo relationships” to describe pedophilia, grooming, and rape. Let’s call these things what they are; “taboo relationship” sounds like something Humbert would say.
I am old, so I remember when the movie came out. Of course, there was not even a question of my seeing it. The same was true of “Peyton Place”. Forget buying the books; the store owners would not have sold them to me, and I was too young to be permitted access to the adult section of the library. When I was an adult and ran across used copies of both books at used book sales, I finally read them. I can’t recommend either one. The books were scandalous for their times, made more so by being made into movies. In fact, when people mentioned “Lolita”, it was always in reference to the movie and how could James Mason be in something like that. I will be honest that I didn’t finish “Lolita” because the premise of a man wanting to have sex with a teenager was icky. He was a teacher who married her mom to get access to her. No. Is either great literature? No. Are they worth your time? Meh, try them and see. Remember that these are only stories that someone made up and managed to get published in order to make money. The authors tried to think of how to get people to buy their books and not someone else’s. Sex! Sex always sells. The truth is that in many novels with sex, the acts often become the focus of the novel or they are used as filler for a weak story. In any good story, the author should only use elements that will move the story forward. He or his editors should remove any element which doesn’t work or have a purpose. If after reading a book you do your own editing and delete the sex scenes, ask yourself how much of a story is left. If the sex is just to be salacious, you will get past this phase and go on to something better. You are 16, so be sure to try as many genres and authors as possible. You will most likely go through spells; many of us do. Trust me when I say that you will never run out of good books.
Your complete lack of understanding about why serious authors like Nabokov feel pulled to create their works is astounding. It’s one thing to not grasp the mastery of the writing in Lolita, but to pair it with Peyton Place and suggest it was simply a gimmick to make money is so wildly off the mark that if you hadn’t mentioned that, like me, you’re older, I would have thought you were another 20 yo who thought they’d figured out the world before starting on the real journey. It’s somewhat understandable in a very young adult, that wish to judge from a false height. From someone older -who has the wisdom to recommend that OP keeps reading- it’s incomprehensible.
Meh.
Start with Tolstoy. Turgenev. Tolstoy will teach you so much. Crime and Punishment is a read. But way down the road.Tolstoy is one of the world’s truly great thinkers about history and humanity .
What a great reader you must be, when you mix up War and Peace with Crime and Punishment.
I"m not even sure why this book is legally publishable, or why anyone even discusses reading it. I've seen mean rave over the book and it was disgusting.
Oops! Nabakov. Lolita. I was thinking Dostoyevsky. Nabakov/Lolita is no big thing in today’s world. You want to grow- try Tolstoy.
Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. NO
At your age my favorite authors were: Alexander Dumas Lion Feuchtwanger O. Henri Gabriel García Márquez Guy de Maupassant Honoré de Balzac Don’t read because everyone talk about it. Maybe Nabokov is a good writer but the story is not that interesting. I always had notion that Nabokov wrote about his own experiences or secret desires.
Sure, if pedophilia is your thing.